measurer wrote:Anais - did you say had told you she was a prison officer, or that she told you she is a psychologist working with prisoners? This woman is starting to sound like someone I knew..

I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Re: Anais..I seem to recall that ages and ages ago she said in a thread that she was a government researcher and that part if her role was interviewing prisoners on a fairly regular basis. So does that all add up?

measurer wrote:Anais - did you say had told you she was a prison officer, or that she told you she is a psychologist working with prisoners? This woman is starting to sound like someone I knew..

I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Ach, I was just being ridiculous but I was out of order saying that, she just iritates me.

I have no idea what level she said she had, I am sure she said she had CT clearance.

dis wrote:I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Developed Vetting (DV) is the highest level of Security Clearance and is required for people with substantial unsupervised access to TOP SECRET assets, or for those working in the Intelligence or Security agencies.

measurer wrote:Anais - did you say had told you she was a prison officer, or that she told you she is a psychologist working with prisoners? This woman is starting to sound like someone I knew..

I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Ach, I was just being ridiculous but I was out of order saying that, she just iritates me.

I have no idea what level she said she had, I am sure she said she had CT clearance.

I think she’s more fantasist than anything. She over eggs the pudding.

mavis cruet wrote:Re: Anais..I seem to recall that ages and ages ago she said in a thread that she was a government researcher and that part if her role was interviewing prisoners on a fairly regular basis. So does that all add up?

If thats true, kind of would add up but makes what she posted on DS the other day even more out of order than it was!

She posted details of a case she had been involved in to back herself up or something the other day. Not sure what the point in her doing it was but it wasn't relevent to the thread

measurer wrote:Anais - did you say had told you she was a prison officer, or that she told you she is a psychologist working with prisoners? This woman is starting to sound like someone I knew..

I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Ach, I was just being ridiculous but I was out of order saying that, she just iritates me.

I have no idea what level she said she had, I am sure she said she had CT clearance.

measurer wrote:Anais - did you say had told you she was a prison officer, or that she told you she is a psychologist working with prisoners? This woman is starting to sound like someone I knew..

I think so, I haven't read the whole thread. I think she might be in MI5 too, by the sounds of it.

There are various levels of security vetting. From the basic DBS to enhanced clearance/developed vetting. If you have regular access to government/official figures or access to sensitive information it will be the DV. If the person in question is working in a prison and has the DV clearance then she is more than a basic prison officer.

Ach, I was just being ridiculous but I was out of order saying that, she just iritates me.

I have no idea what level she said she had, I am sure she said she had CT clearance.

I think she’s more fantasist than anything. She over eggs the pudding.

Grafenwalder wrote:The loopy lesbian is at it again spouting more man hate. The fucking idiot thinks children and mothers are 'more important' than old men. A relative of mine was just 20 when cancer killed him.

mavis cruet wrote:Re: Anais..I seem to recall that ages and ages ago she said in a thread that she was a government researcher and that part if her role was interviewing prisoners on a fairly regular basis. So does that all add up?

If thats true, kind of would add up but makes what she posted on DS the other day even more out of order than it was!

She posted details of a case she had been involved in to back herself up or something the other day. Not sure what the point in her doing it was but it wasn't relevent to the thread

She has been reading/posting here so maybe she will come tell us.

Yes, i read the whole thread but did not see the bit you mentioned that Anais deleted. I am pretty certain i remember correctly but it's just a shame i cannot recall which thread!! Or even which year Obviously was a crime related one though, maybe even a Maddie one

Grafenwalder wrote:The loopy lesbian is at it again spouting more man hate. The fucking idiot thinks children and mothers are 'more important' than old men. A relative of mine was just 20 when cancer killed him.

Grafenwalder wrote:The loopy lesbian is at it again spouting more man hate. The fucking idiot thinks children and mothers are 'more important' than old men. A relative of mine was just 20 when cancer killed him.

mavis cruet wrote:Re: Anais..I seem to recall that ages and ages ago she said in a thread that she was a government researcher and that part if her role was interviewing prisoners on a fairly regular basis. So does that all add up?

If thats true, kind of would add up but makes what she posted on DS the other day even more out of order than it was!

She posted details of a case she had been involved in to back herself up or something the other day. Not sure what the point in her doing it was but it wasn't relevent to the thread

She has been reading/posting here so maybe she will come tell us.

Yes, i read the whole thread but did not see the bit you mentioned that Anais deleted. I am pretty certain i remember correctly but it's just a shame i cannot recall which thread!! Or even which year Obviously was a crime related one though, maybe even a Maddie one

Its in here a few pages back poss 20 pages back. The mods deleted the comment but a guesty found it in a long nest of quotes